Thoughts? To me it looks like it was meant to be a gravel race bike. They realized it was already going to be outdated and just marketed it as an endurance bike. I like the 1x sram 13 speed idea. But at least a 44 or a 46 up front. Not a 40. I don’t really care about the top spec being 16k. Its expensive but no one buying the top spec cares anyways. I am interested in the value of the lower spec. What are alls thoughts? Looks nice just the tire clearance is a little funny looking.
1 Like
I think that at this point, all of the brands know how to build out solid tire clearance, and with bikes like these, why wouldn’t you max it out without having to compromise anything else and keeping a traditional frame shape?
This is probably the bike that a big portion of the population should be riding on, in my opinion.
A 40t chainring and 40-45mm tires are likely perfect for many.
3 Likes
I think the problem with the chainring size: at that price you should expect that companies allow you to choose stem lengths, cockpit sizes, crank length, cassette, chainring, etc.
These super expensive bikes do not appeal to me ever since getting my first fully custom bike.
Overall, the 1x13 configuration is the one to watch. I wonder if there will be more once SRAM releases cheaper 1x13 group sets.
Form follows function.
3 Likes
I agree. But the thing max’s out at 42mm. Honestly, I know wider tire’s are faster but 42 is a bit much. 35 I can get behind for an endurance bike. But I don’t think the average person on this bike is running a 42.
And are you not sacrificing aero dynamics? I get it is not a race bike. But there is a reason they don’t jump from Road race to gravel bike. An endurance bike is supposed to be faster then a gravel bike. Is aero not one of the main differences?
Fair points.
1 Like
The SuperSix Evo already fits 35 and slightly bigger. I run 36 WAM on mine during the winter. The 40 makes sense with Pirelli and Schwalbe going bigger with their faster road tires.
It does look very close to the new SuperX. The big difference is downtube storage and a tad higher stack (15mm in my size). The weirder part is that it (Synapse) has a longer wheelbase, longer chainstays, and a lower BB than the gravel bike (SuperX). So I’d say just get the SuperX unless you really want the internal storage.
1 Like
That’s a pretty risky statement. I can’t project what applies to the population, but anecdotally: the three people I know who either do or did ride Synapses would ALL be on 42’s or whatever the max width is, including myself.
At appropriate pressures, wider is not slower but wider IS more comfortable… and for spending hours and hours on an ENDURANCE bike, especially when overweight or not a super-powerful rider, that comfort is godly.
I made my daily-driver road bike a Diverge a few years ago precisely so I could ride for hours in comfort. I’m on 44mm tires. And I sold my top-of-the-line Synapse to move to the Diverge, ONLY because it maxed out at 32mm tires.
1 Like
Wait… only ONE, single, lonely SRAM configuration? Where are my 2x12 Force and Red AXS builds? I don’t do Shimano… 
2 Likes
Totally agree, with 40’s being released and “old” endurance bikes like the Giant Defy already taking 38’s, the comments would have been along the lines of “obsolete before released” if it didn’t at least take 40’s
With people running 30/32 on race bikes (in races) I can’t see the issue, just because it can take 42’s doesn’t mean you have to, I could see a lot of these bikes being run in the 36/38 region, I would think that 42 just opens the appeal of the bike, maybe ultra endurance, all road
4 Likes
I think the strategy is pretty obvious: Cannondale is giving its customers options and allows them to use their Synapse not just as a “traditional” endurance road bike, but also a gravel bike. And even offroad, the Synapse with knobby(ier) tires still has the geometry, and thus, the feel of a proper road bike. I reckon this will be very popular. Plus, for customers who don’t care as much about speed and want extra comfort, you can get 40 mm slicks these days. This is very much the philosophy of one of the first modern gravel bikes, Open’s UP.
And what about customers who don’t want to take it offroad? Well, just stick to the tire width you want and don’t use the extra clearance.
How do you know? Where I live, gravel bikes have taken over from hardtails as the default bike for people who want to get around. That’s because they are very versatile, light, fast and robust while being comfortable due to large tires.
I can see myself putting 45 mm slicks or so on my commuter. The extra width would allow me to ride some gravel, give me extra traction for when I pull a trailer (important for breaking performance) while still being quite fast. But it need not be a setup optimized for all-out speed.
There are a few assumptions baked in here: the first is that it will be slower due to extra tire clearance. Are you sure about that? There are some very aero bikes that have wide fork legs to be aero. I reckon there are many gravel bikes that are faster than many road bikes.
Secondly, the added flexibility will be a boon to most customers. Once they realize that they can turn their new road bike, which rides like a proper road bike by simply changing tires, they’ll be happy.
Thirdly, it might simplify manufacturers’ line-ups (Cannondale isn’t the only company doing this, e. g. BMC’s new Roadmachine very much follows the same recipe): You have your traditional race bikes (which these days also have up to 33–35 mm tire clearance!), endurance/groad bikes and then chunky gravel bikes with clearance for MTB tires.
5 Likes
When we’re talking 40mm on half decent tarmac then wider is certainly slower. There’s a reason the pros are riding around on ~28mm (maybe 30mm if on wide hookless rims ) and not 40mm. The question is really whether losing a little bit of speed for improved comfort and grip is a good trade off - for many or most people who don’t race (or aren’t racing that bike at that time) then it is.
1 Like
The key is comfort: a harsher ride can make you slower, because e. g. you are not able to hold an aero position (which is likely a much more significant factor). So in an ideal setting (i. e. an aero position and assuming that a harsher ride won’t impact your performance), you may be slower on 40 mm tires. But you (= a more average person) could still be faster in real life on wider tires.
The new generation of aero road bikes is taking this to heart as well: they often have higher stack and put riders in a less aggressive position. But if that allows the rider to stay in a more aero position for longer, it is a net win.
Road quality is another thing: it can vary wildly depending on where you live. Where I live now we have cobbles, some are pretty bad. Riding cobbles on 28 mm (measuring (29.5 mm)) wide tires is not fun.
1 Like
To me, the Synapse fills the spot of a bike that can do most things well. And can be ridden as a single setup that can handle almost every road. Here’s what I mean. I see so many post about gravel bikes with two wheel setups. A do-it-all 1 bike for everything with a gravel setup and road setup. That’s great. But it’s still a minor hassle to swap wheels. And even then, what if I change my mind while out riding. I’m on the road setup with skinny slicks and I want to go ride my gravel route. Or I throw on my gravel wheels but not feeling it and just want to ride road. Yea, it’s not a major deal but I personally hate knobby gravel tires on tarmac.
The Synapse would let you have 1 setup. Put on some 40c slicks or semi-slicks, and you can ride whatever. No wheel changes. It can handle road and most gravel. It’s a small thing yes, but would be nice to just have the simplicity of 1 setup that’s ready to go, instead of having to swap wheels.
My concern is geo. It has a longer wheelbase and lower BB than the SuperX. Which is then way different than a road race bike that I’m used to.. i’m almost wondering if the SuperX would feel more like a road bike than the Synapse.
2 Likes
I agree 28mm on cobbles is unpleasant, but cobbles aren’t tarmac! I also agree and said above that for many or most people comfort is likely a good trade off for losing a bit of speed.
Neither of these things make wider tyres faster though, and for those for whom speed is a priority (and who are riding on tarmac) then they’d be better off addressing their fit, strength or mobility limiters that are stopping them from being able to stay aero. Speaking as an averagely talented middle aged man with a slammed aero bike, 28mm tyres, less than optimal roads (UK) who has absolutely no problem staying aero for my events (usually up to 2-3 hours, occasionally up to 4) and regularly rides 100+ miles I can vouch that it’s absolutely possible and I know many others in their 40s and 50s who have no need to go wider to stay aero. I don’t think aero bike geometry has changed all that much, and at least some of the changes have been driven not by amateurs needing to be more comfortable but by the changing positions of the pros who now nearly all realise that the most aero position is on the hoods not the drops, and are often achieving that position by going with a smaller bike size with a longer stem.
I sometimes run 30mm on the back, run 32mm on my winter bike and have a spare set of aero wheels with 40mm road tyres for my gravel bike so I’m not in any way opposed to going wider when speed isn’t the most important thing.
I’d argue that this bike is neither trying to be nor cares about these people. They have the SuperSix. It’s not marketed for them. And that’s not even getting into the discussion about how many watts you are actually getting with skinnier tires (1W? 2W maybe).
I’d even argue that if you’re willing or wanting to discuss the aero gains of tires, or that’s even a consideration of yours when buying a bike, then don’t even look at this bike. Like, if the speed of various tires is something you care about, then this isn’t a bike for you. The Venn diagram overlap of those people is so minuscule that I don’t think Cannondale even considers them. I just don’t think the endurance category is for people who consider the aero watt differences between 28c and 40c tires.
5 Likes
This 100%
If you get off your bike and immediately analyze your average speed (for whatever reason), then buy a different bike.
If a 40mm tire is causing you to miss out on something due to a lack of aerodynamics when riding above 25mph, again, maybe buy a different bike.
If, however, you do not care about whether you’re moving across the earth at 18mph or 23mph and are looking for a versatile and comfortable bike to enjoy the experience, this could be a great bike for you.
Sometimes cycling is supposed to be fun and not a competition, and most cyclists in the world probably look at it this way.
Race bikes have their place (highly competitive racing), but when you remove all of the requirements of that somewhat niche use of a bicycle, the priorities change.
I don’t wear Nike Alphaflys every time I step out the door, and I don’t drive a sports car. I use the product that best fits my needs.
5 Likes
its $16k and it is heavy even in Lab71 guise and it is ugly.
To offer a counterpoint, I think it’s a great looking bike. Better looking than a Tarmac SL8. Which just shows that looks are subjective.
And for the price, welcome to the post tariff world. Even if it’s just the US getting crazy tariffs, it would appear that brands are going to spread the love everywhere.
And the argument (not saying you) that an endurance bike shouldn’t be expensive because it’s heavy or isn’t a race bike is kind of silly in my opinion. G Wagons are crazy expensive and I think they ugly as sin and they’re not a super car. The Tesla garbage bin looking truck is ludicrously priced and probably more error prone than any bike and people buy it. Prices are what they are, and people buy things. Luxury items (Lab 71) are luxury items. People aren’t going to buy this expecting the fastest race bike. They want a nice bike that’s comfortable.
6 Likes
I’d love to have a Synapse, a Defy, etc as my go-to bike, particularly a lower-tier level. 40mm light gravel, endurance rides, commute, ride with my 7yo daughter, trainer, rainy crappy days, etc.
Totally agree! I think it’s a great bike and what lots of people should be riding. Just objecting to the claim that 40mm tyres are faster unless we’re talking a very specific (and for most of us rare) scenario like cobbles. I’ll stop taking the thread off on a tangent now…
2 Likes